13 Comments

  1. Jeremiah

    I’m pretty sure the Komen foundation’s hands were tied, as their by-laws require them to de-fund any organization under congressional investigation. (At least that is what I read.) That said, no amount of good work can in my mind erase the fundamental callous disregard for human life that marks the PP organization in general. They are institutionally racist, have no problem breaking the law, and market themselves in vile and disgusting ways. In short, they are wholly undeserving of even a modicum of support. If cancer screening needs to be funded in an area, then a clinic or some other non-profit can pick up the slack.

    Reply
      1. Jeremiah

        Institutional Racism: 1) PP was founded on the principles of eugenics and though they no longer embrace the idea they still target minority neighborhoods. 2) PP in multiple states was shown to willingly and without difficulty accept the donations of people posing as racists who demanded that donated funds be designated for specific minorities

        Willingness to flout the law: Undercover videos of PP show local directors aiding what they believed to be underage pimping operations and in one instance even going so far as to explain to the pimp how he can avoid police detection.

        Vile marketing: The most obvious example that comes to mind is when PP printed a bunch of shirts as a fundraiser that declared in large letters: “I had an abortion.” I understand that the poor in particular are put in a difficult place, and I have only compassion for someone who feels they have to abort a baby rather than watch it starve. However, the idea of people walking around flaunting abortions on t-shirts is just purely disgusting.

        Reply

        1. Jeremiah, I’ll check out the first one.

          the second charge, however, has been misreported, or underreported.

          the third one, yup. vile

          Reply

        2. but, wouldn’t it be better to use influence to ratchet that down while doing good?

          Reply
  2. Doug

    i dont believe that PP owned/leased or operated any mamogram machines. Apparently, the screenings were self examinations which are not realible. Dont think for one moment poor women will lose access to breast cancer exams.

    Reply
  3. Gary

    I am against abortion….however, I do not consider that I, or the government, has the right to tell a woman what she can or cannot do concerning a early-term fetus. Regarding the administration ruling, I think it was not smart politically in an election year. To quote “the President’s actions in mandating that religious institutions go against their beliefs and offer birth control”….there are two parties involved with this decision. One, the organization that is suppose to provide health care options. Two, the employee, who may or may not be a member of the religion of the employing organization. It seems to me that the rule forces the organization to provide a selective type of health care available to all employees elsewhere. So the organization has a problem. However, the ruling guarantees the rights of the employee, who may or may not be a member of the religion. As such, if the employee is a Catholic, they shouldn’t accept the benefit, because of their personal beliefs. But if the employee is not Catholic, and they want the benefit, why should they be denied the health benefit that everyone else is entitled to? So it is a classic, business (even though a religious organization) right verses an employee right. Why should an employee be denied coverage if they want it, while the same benefit is provided to other employees of non-religious employers? The basis of most employment is “equal opportunity” regardless of religion. What if a religion is poor/limited in assets, and they want to pay someone below minimum wage. Is this OK? What if the religion believes in prayer for healing only? Should they be allowed to hire employees, and provide them a bible instead of health care benefits? If they hire “non-members”, they have an obligation to provide benefits just as all other non-religious employers do. Otherwise, they should only hire Catholics. Of course, then they will not recieve FEDERAL funding for their services. So it all comes down to how badly they want Federal money.

    Reply
  4. MrRoivas

    “1) PP was founded on the principles of eugenics and though they no longer embrace the idea they still target minority neighborhoods.”

    False on all counts. Like many people at the time, Margaret Sanger believed in some principals of eugenics. PP was founded though to promote women’s health and the ability to make choices for their own body. Eugenics never entered into it. And PP doesn’t target minority neighborhoods. It provides services to poor ones. A still present truth is that minority neighborhoods are still often the poorest ones. Don’t blame PP for going where they are needed.

    “2) PP in multiple states was shown to willingly and without difficulty accept the donations of people posing as racists who demanded that donated funds be designated for specific minorities. ”

    Some malicious people with have repeatedly attempted to entrap PP with tactics such as pretending to be racists wanting more abortions for black people. They have never succeeded at what they attempt to do, proving that PP is racist somehow. It doesn’t stop them from claiming victory anyways.

    “Willingness to flout the law: Undercover videos of PP show local directors aiding what they believed to be underage pimping operations and in one instance even going so far as to explain to the pimp how he can avoid police detection. ”

    See above.

    “However, the idea of people walking around flaunting abortions on t-shirts is just purely disgusting.”

    Why? The fact that you use the word “disgusting” says lot more about you than the people wearing such shirts.

    Reply

  5. At this time, 40 years post Roe v. Wade, I think it is impossible to be pro-life, a Democrat and a Christian. I tried that. Finally, you just have to wake up. 54 million dead babies and you’re trying to kid yourself into thinking Planned Parenthood is about something other than killing babies for money. The blindness of the Germans in the 1930s was nothing compared to Christians in the USA in the 21st century. The cancer rate for women using birth control and/or getting abortions is much higher than the general population. Suicide rates for women who’ve had abortions is much higher than those who carry to term. Abortion numbers just go up and up as contraception is encouraged, and now urged on young teens, and given free by mandate of our government. Abortionists make much more money per “delivery” than the ob/gyn who delivers a full term baby. An abortionist can do 4 before lunch and not be bothered with all those pesky office visits for 6-8 months and midnight labor; it’s about greed, it’s about death, it is anti-life, it is anti-Christian. 40% of abortions are for black women–but you’ll be told it’s not racist? 93% of Down Syndrome babies are aborted–but you have nothing against disabled people? You are really conflicted.

    Reply

    1. A lot of GOP talking points, to be sure. And yet, even with GOP CONTOLLED governments, no change. They just kill people in different ways.

      You can be pro-life and Democrat, but I still find it difficult to explain a Christian Republican

      Reply

Leave a Reply, Please!